if pirates lived in my neighborhood and were kidnapping people I would either make sure the police were alerted to their presence or I would deserve to get bombed.
they can not be allowed to kidnap people who have done nothing except be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
if it was your loved one, or you, you would agree I suspect.

Are you in agreement with those who thought the WTC dead were collaborators and deserved to die? Seems to me a world where the good guys always wear white and the bad guys always wear black only exists in hollywood.

we are talking about pirates. PIRATES. otherwise known as thugs and criminals who kidnap and kill people for a living.
know how to deal with thugs? if they pull a knife you pull a gun. if they pull a gun you pull a 75mm recoilless.
what, out of curiosity, would do? particularly if they kill the guy and they have threatened if they are not paid?

relativism. are you saying that because some bad things were done in GitMo or Gaza or whereever else that we should allow innocent people to be kidnapped and killed?
I hate to keep bringing it up but I strongly suspect that if it was you or a loved one you would see things differently.

they are "loved" by their neighbors. now allowing for cultural differences I dont really see how you could love kidnappers unless you were asking for some collateral damage.

I certainly think it should be avoided at almost any cost. where I would draw the line is that they AND their neighbors have to be shown in no uncertain terms that this will not be tolerated. also I dont see why they cant be taken out at sea. surly we have satellites that monitor every inch of that area. and if we dont its obviously time we did.

...now allowing for cultural differences I dont really see how you could love kidnappers unless you were asking for some collateral damage.

We do it, or did it with alarming frequency. So, back to my original question, do you then agree that the WTC was justifiable collateral damage?

And apart from that, I simply do not think that the US should be playing superman particularly when it comes to protecting corporate business. Obviously the 20,000 or so commercial ships that pass through the Horn of Africa are taking a well calculated risk, iow they are making good money and more than likely insured up the wazoo.

but if a slow friday so lets have a whack.
first off. I never approved of Rendition. anyone who did it or approved it should be tried in a US court as far as I am concerned.
second, of course I dont agree with your ridiculous relativism about the WTC.
finally, so your solution is to do nothing unless you are directly affected.
got it.

Collateral damage was the reason and justification for bombing the WTC by many. You are comfortable with regarding Somali citizens who do not turn in their Pirate neighbors. I do not see this as much different, save that many who view WTC as collateral damage were directly affected by US policy.

Another analogous situation, which you mention, would be the collateral damage, in Pakistan drone killings.

None of the collateral damage in these examples is fine and dandy AFAIAC.

I believe that paying the ransom is appropriate here, and arresting and trying the pirates would be in order. Killing and bombing alleged bad guys and their neighbors seems absolutely immoral and crazy to me.

He says the Maersk Alabama has a lot of people "shaking their fists." He advises, though, it would be better to "keep an eye on the big picture and look at the end game."

Some have suggested a very targeted military response, such as destroying the pirate mother ships or the pirate leader mansions built from ransom money. Patch advises caution there as well.

"If there was any kind of effort to move ashore, if I was making any recommendations, it would be to ensure it's a multi-lateral approach...sanctioned by the UN. That is, very clear and specific information on what the objective is that you're going after.... Imagine the ramifications if we hit the wrong house, the wrong village and we have 50 dead Somali civilians on our hands. That is an issue that might result in much worse situations and, frankly, a policy outcome that the US doesn't necessarily want," he says.

To cover a small port small port would be easy, iow there would be no pirate attacks. These pirates use the coastline and the over 2 million sq miles fully.

For more info here and here. As far as starting a land campaign, or occupying the country/port, John Patch an associate professor for strategic intelligence at the US Army War College and a retired Navy surface warfare officer and career intelligence officer, believes that our hands are full at the moment. I tend to agree.

There are a bunch of sailors who've been getting neither attention, glory, nor action for years. You think they're not polishing all their weapons at a fever pitch, getting ready for the coming "fight" with the pirates?

I mean, when was the last time the Navy "fought" a surface action against anyone, let alone fighting it with a major ship? Maybe back in the days of PBRs on the rivers of Vietnam? And, remember, those were not major ships like the frigates/destroyers involved here.

Those sailors (and especially their captains) are messing their pants with anticipation.

And, then, think of all the barroom stories about fighting pirates they'll all be able to tell for the rest of their lives....

who are mostly recently teen ago boys who think being a pirate is cool, that the pirates are really not so bad and they have never harmed anyone and injuries will only probably happen if the navy intervenes.
I dont get it. I was a merchant seaman. that could be me.
I say show these pirates worlds end US Navy style.

though if you travel internationally you need to be prepared to pay the vig wherever you go.

Piracy is the lawless Somali version of a toll or a tax to use their waterways...killing these guys is only gonna make the situation hairier. I don't know how you'd go about it, but the best thing would be for the international shippers and the pirates to negotiate some kind of proper toll or tax collection...the shippers get use of Somali waters, the Somalis get their vig without violence...everybody wins.

All those pirate buddies coming out to the rescue of their fellow pirates has got to be about the single dumbest thing I've ever heard of doing.

The Navy's got one ship already on station, another closing in, and a couple more on the way, not to mention aircraft on scene, too. So, all the pirates are going out there. Dumb, dumber and dumbest. They should be staying on-shore and hanging out with their pirate groupies and accountants and PR people, waiting for the heat to leave.

As one other commenter indicated, the Navy's going to show the pirates World's End.

What is a little bit ironic is that the american left opposed US intervention in somalia (war for oil many claimed). So we leave after public sentiment turns, the place returns to anarchy and now theyve finally decided to export the larceny beyond their own borders.

This might fall under the category of unintended consquences... But the irony probably won't be fully realized until they capture a greenpeace ship.

* Coastal States exercise sovereignty over their territorial sea which they have the right to establish its breadth up to a limit not to exceed 12 nautical miles; foreign vessels are allowed "innocent passage" through those waters*

pillages the "international" waters off of the Somali coast the fishermen of Somalia are just supposed to roll over and starve because those are the "rules", "rules" that the Somali people had no say in?

There is nothing to stop them. Corporations will decide whether it is better for the bottom line to allow a ship to be held and pay ransom or put security on board. It's passed on to the consumer (or hits the bottom line of that great insurer AIG)

if all they did was steal money or goods from multinational corporations I would be a lot more likely to agree with you.
when you kidnap someone and threaten to kill them, even if you dont ultimately do that, thats where my tolerance for it ends.
and I suppose I am more up in arms because I used to do this. its pretty easy to imagine myself in that persons shoes.

would be a wonderful tool to use against the pirates. Lob a few shots close enough to them when they are heading out to sea to discourage them from going further, and letting them know they are in our sites and we're constantly watching them.

Somali pirates holding an American hostage on a drifting lifeboat want $2 million for his release, a fellow pirate onshore said on Friday.

The pirate, speaking to Reuters from Haradheere port, also said other pirates were taking a hijacked German ship, with foreign crew on board, towards the scene in the Indian Ocean where the lifeboat is floating, watched by U.S. warships.

they pay a heck of a lot more for an ad in prime time teevee than the ransom is. At the same time, these merchant marines I am sure are getting great pay for where they are going, so they knew the risks before they signed on.

As far as the ships from their pirate buddies coming to their aid, I dont think they will make it near them at all. I hope the US would intercept these ships before they made it.

but I didnt state it quite right either. What I meant was that these merchant marines have to know the dangers of the Somali and the companies should prepare them better and I would think that they are paid comparable to combat pay rather than ordinary pay, if that makes more sense to you. The whole situation is just sad, I feel sorry for the Captain and feel he is very brave. The pirates on the other hand are just filling their coffers, just like the greedy Wall St. bastids.

I just hope they dont let the boats of pirates headed out to help them to get through. That would be the worst possible thing that could happen.

More about the escape attempt. How far did he get? Was there a contingency plan in place to respond to unforeseen circumstances such as an escape attempt and if so, why wasn't it implemented. If the pictures I see are accurate, taking these guys out w/o hurting the hostage shouldn't be too difficult.

I think the scenario was a bit different for the French. This case has what, 7 guys on a open dingy? No real place for them to hide or ambush assault teams, no time to clear, visually or with force if neccesary the entire vessel. Couple snipers and a couple frogmen.